That means the 12 policewomen also can wear their uniforms again and return to full patrol duty instead of the light-duty, plainclothes desk work they had been relegated to for not passing the annual Physical Abilities Test.

Quote:

According to the lawsuit, 35 percent of the department's women in that demographic and less than 2 percent of the male officers failed the test in September 2014, the first time it was administered. They then were subject to punitive measures.

They do crusaders. We curve the outcome for people intellectually. You can't find one scientist that will tell you ethnicities are equal when it comes to intelligence. Asians are the smartest people on Earth, no ifs, buts or ands about it.

I am not, if you could find one reputable study that disagrees with me please post it. In fact I challenge anyone to do so. My point is, if it's ok to curve intelligence, then why not curve physical performance also.

They do crusaders. We curve the outcome for people intellectually. You can't find one scientist that will tell you ethnicities are equal when it comes to intelligence. Asians are the smartest people on Earth, no ifs, buts or ands about it.

Big place.

James Woods is more intelligent than Einstein. Not sure there's a point to be made by your claim, true or not other than to consider the intelligence test is man-made.

If IQ scores were so great at determining and predicting intelligence, why aren't high-IQ-based societies, like MENSA, consulted as an authority on...anything? They're not, because IQ tests are junk and do not predict much of anything.

So, right off the bat, we can disregard the very methodology that is at the heart of your argument.

Next, because race isn't biologically real (link) we can disregard any correlation there might be between IQ (an unreliable test) and race (a method of othering based on perceived differences).

Finally, even if race was real and IQ tests/scores were valid, we know that socioeconomic factors play a part in scores. A great example of how socioeconomics matters is right in the USA. African Americans used to score, on average, 15 points below Caucasians. Today, it's 10 points. Why? Well, AA have greater access to education today (link).

If IQ scores were so great at determining and predicting intelligence, why aren't high-IQ-based societies, like MENSA, consulted as an authority on...anything? They're not, because IQ tests are junk and do not predict much of anything.

So, right off the bat, we can disregard the very methodology that is at the heart of your argument.

Next, because race isn't biologically real (link) we can disregard any correlation there might be between IQ (an unreliable test) and race (a method of othering based on perceived differences).

Finally, even if race was real and IQ tests/scores were valid, we know that socioeconomic factors play a part in scores. A great example of how socioeconomics matters is right in the USA. African Americans used to score, on average, 15 points below Caucasians. Today, it's 10 points. Why? Well, AA have greater access to education today (link).

It's not education that increases iq, I attribute the rise along with most scientist due to diets which affects brain development, along with mixing with other races.